Corning's new Gorilla Glass 2 will allow smartphone makers to produce glass panels that are up to 20 percent thinner while maintaining the same levels of strength and durability.

The new Gorilla Glass was unveiled this week in Las Vegas, Nev., at the Consumer Electronics Show. While the original Gorilla Glass was about 1 millimeter thick, the new material is 20 percent thinner at just 0.8mm.

Corning said Gorilla Glass 2 will enable device makers to build thinner and sleeker devices with brighter images and greater touch sensitivity. Gorilla Glass is widely believed to be used in Apple's iPhone and iPad, though the company has not revealed its suppliers for recent products like the iPhone 4S and iPad 2.

"Corning Gorilla Glass has enjoyed tremendous market adoption in the high-growth mobile handset and computing device market, providing a replacement for plastic and legacy soda-lime glass as a protective cover and elegant design solution," said James R. Steiner, senior vice president and general manager, Corning Specialty Materials.

"We knew Corning Gorilla Glass could get even better. So, in response to our customers drive toward thinner form factors, we designed this new glass to enable meaningful reduction in thickness without sacrificing the outstanding glass performance for which Gorilla Glass has become highly recognized. This glass, along with Windows operating system innovations from Microsoft, will help deliver exceptional beauty, performance, and toughness for new Windows PCs. You will see this early this year with Windows-based PCs which we expect to be the first in-market laptops designed to leverage the performance of our new second-generation glass."

Product qualification and design implementation for Corning Gorilla Glass 2 is said to be underway with Corning's customers. Devices featuring Gorilla Glass 2 will reportedly be unveiled over the coming months. According to Gizmodo, while the new glass is just 0.8mm, it can withstand 121 pounds of pressure without cracking.

Corning's special glass is 20 times stiffer and 30 times harder than plastic, thanks to a chemically strengthened alkali-aluminosilicate material. It is the most widely used cover glass, featured in more than 30 major brands and 575 different product models, with more than 500 million units sold worldwide.

Gorilla Glass sales are expected to reach more than $700 million in 2011. That's more than triple what Corning sold in 2010.

"Were very excited about the introduction of Cornings thin, high-performing Gorilla Glass 2, said Nick Parker, vice president, Worldwide OEM Marketing, Microsoft. As Windows continues to bring new experiences to customers on new devices, we look to Corning to bring innovative, durable glass solutions that enable brighter images and greater touch sensitivity."

"We knew Corning Gorilla Glass could get even better. So, in response to our customers drive toward thinner form factors, we designed this new glass to enable meaningful reduction in thickness without sacrificing the outstanding glass performance for which Gorilla Glass has become highly recognized. This glass, along with Windows operating system innovations from Microsoft, will help deliver exceptional beauty, performance, and toughness for new Windows PCs. You will see this early this year with Windows-based PCs which we expect to be the first in-market laptops designed to leverage the performance of our new second-generation glass."

Is that a quote from a Corning guy or a Microsoft guy? The whole paragraph makes no mention of who said it \

There's something else behind that "public" number. Like sales claims that use language like "four times less than the leading competitor!" 121 psi? 121 lbs on that shiny metal display they have in the shot? Well, no - the test video on Gizmodo shows a rig - probably some sort of standard - with a defined probe trying to push through a defined disc of glass with with a (70's throwback wood-grained red-LED-segment display) force sensor. Still pretty tough stuff, their demo really shows that it's 20% thinner with the same strength. I'd continue to avoid back pocket storage, if only to not have to explain it to the medical professionals who will have to attend any wounds. The deflection demo with the steel balls is impressive for a piece of glass to bend without breaking.

My iPhone 4 fell 3 feet from my pocket and the screen completely shattered. My iPhone 4S screen came in contact with my keys in my pocket and now has a permanent scratch across it. In real-world conditions Gorilla Glass is extremely fragile. All these claims of strength are a bunch of B.S.

I thought the reverse. This announcement seems really underwhelming to me.

A slight improvement in the exact same properties as the current Gorilla Glass which is itself slightly improved from the first incarnation of it? I was expecting more given the hype before the announcement.

Also, there is no mention here of the only metric that really matters which is incidence of shattering when a strong sideways force is applied. In other words is it going to break less often when dropped?

Bendability is irrelevant. Only a complete idiot would put a glass phone in their back pocket and then sit down whereas lots and lots of very intelligent people accidentally drop their phones daily.

My iPhone 4 fell 3 feet from my pocket and the screen completely shattered. My iPhone 4S screen came in contact with my keys in my pocket and now has a permanent scratch across it. In real-world conditions Gorilla Glass is extremely fragile. All these claims of strength are a bunch of B.S.

I wouldn't call the claims B S, but I certainly agree they are not scratch resistant. In fact I'd say it scratches easier than regular brittle glass.

In the SJ Bio it was suggested that it was SJ that was responsible for the re-emergence of Gorilla glass. That production had been shelved until Steve made them pick it up again. I am surprised Apple didn't make moves to restrict access for competing companies.

I wouldn't call the claims B S, but I certainly agree they are not scratch resistant. In fact I'd say it scratches easier than regular brittle glass.

In the SJ Bio it was suggested that it was SJ that was responsible for the re-emergence of Gorilla glass. That production had been shelved until Steve made them pick it up again. I am surprised Apple didn't make moves to restrict access for competing companies.

not sure about that...
my 55" Sony TV is covered with a single pane of Gorrilla Glass.

Pounds are a unit of force, not pressure. Being able to withstand 121 pounds of force means absolutely nothing on it's own. How much is the force spread out? How far is it from the supports?

That being said, this looks very promising. I wonder if the 4S already uses it (or a variant) and that's one of the reasons why Apple kept their lips sealed?

Apple actually asked Corning to come up with Gorilla Glass. Corning dug up some old research they didn't think had any market value. Apple pushed them to turn it in to a product in a short period of time. Now it is a 700 million a year business. Reminds me of Xerox. Except in the case of Xerox, they didn't know they had something of value until too late. We would still be using plastic computers right now if it were not for Apple pushing the boundaries.

Pounds are units of mass, not force, but the rest of your argument is reasonable.

So many great gadgets on CES... The CES coverage on AI is (expectedly) lacking... Oh, well...

No, Newtons are a unit of force, grams are a unit of mass, and pounds are a bizarre anachronism of the British Imperial system of units, which for some reason the United States of America has decided to cling to (despite a fairly violent split from the British Empire from 1773 through about the next century).

I do like the original comment, but those slagging the author should be aware that the way glass cracks isn't as simple as just applied force or pressure, as it would be for less brittle materials.

We would still be using plastic computers right now if it were not for Apple pushing the boundaries.

You mean metal ones.

Everybody made hulking metal behemoths with no regard for weight or aesthetics until the plastic Apple ][ was released. Then everyone made plastic laptops (and continued to make metal desktops for whatever stupid reason). THEN Apple discovered how to make computers out of one piece of metal, and boom, the unibody was born.

I pretty much have zero faith in the mainstream media to get technical details correct, so im not surprised that they messed up the units of presssure.

You have zero faith in the mainstream media, but you'll accept Wikipedia as a source?

Pound is traditionally defined as a measure of weight. Weight is force, not mass (That is, it is the downward force on an object caused by gravity). The confusion is caused by the fact that normal experience is that all of us experience 1 G acceleration due to gravity, so force and mass are considered equivalent when it comes to 'weight'.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

You have zero faith in the mainstream media, but you'll accept Wikipedia as a source?

Pound is traditionally defined as a measure of weight. Weight is force, not mass (That is, it is the downward force on an object caused by gravity). The confusion is caused by the fact that normal experience is that all of us experience 1 G acceleration due to gravity, so force and mass are considered equivalent when it comes to 'weight'.

Wikipedia is correct on this one. As it usually is on scientific issues, since the articles are mostly written by fairly knowledgeable authors - unlike most media journalists.

Already posted this in another thread, but more relevant here, Titbit from the biography:

"Next was glass. “After we did metal, I looked at Jony and said that we had to master glass,” said Jobs. For the Apple stores, they had created huge windowpanes and glass stairs. For the iPhone, the original plan was for it to have a plastic screen, like the iPod. But Jobs decided it would feel much more elegant and substantive if the screens were glass. So he set about finding a glass that would be strong and resistant to scratches.
The natural place to look was Asia, where the glass for the stores was being made. But Jobs’s friend John Seeley Brown, who was on the board of Corning Glass in Upstate New York, told him that he should talk to that company’s young and dynamic CEO, Wendell Weeks. So he dialed the main Corning switchboard number and asked to be put through to Weeks. He got an assistant, who offered to pass along the message. “No, I’m Steve Jobs,” he replied. “Put me through.” The assistant refused. Jobs called Brown and complained that he had been subjected to “typical East Coast bullshit.” When Weeks heard that, he called the main Apple switchboard and asked to speak to Jobs. He was told to put his request in writing and send it in by fax. When Jobs was told what happened, he took a liking to Weeks and invited him to Cupertino.
Jobs described the type of glass Apple wanted for the iPhone, and Weeks told him that Corning had developed a chemical exchange process in the 1960s that led to what they dubbed “gorilla glass.” It was incredibly strong, but it had never found a market, so Corning quit making it. Jobs said he doubted it was good enough, and he started explaining to Weeks how glass was made. This amused Weeks, who of course knew more than Jobs about that topic. “Can you shut up,” Weeks interjected, “and let me teach you some science?” Jobs was taken aback and fell silent. Weeks went to the whiteboard and gave a tutorial on the chemistry, which involved an ion-exchange process that produced a compression layer on the surface of the glass. This turned Jobs around, and he said he wanted as much gorilla glass as Corning could make within six months. “We don’t have the capacity,” Weeks replied. “None of our plants make the glass now.”incredibly strong, but it had never found a market, so Corning quit making it. Jobs said he doubted it was good enough, and he started explaining to Weeks how glass was made. This amused Weeks, who of course knew more than Jobs about that topic. “Can you shut up,” Weeks interjected, “and let me teach you some science?” Jobs was taken aback and fell silent. Weeks went to the whiteboard and gave a tutorial on the chemistry, which involved an ion-exchange process that produced a compression layer on the surface of the glass. This turned Jobs around, and he said he wanted as much gorilla glass as Corning could make within six months. “We don’t have the capacity,” Weeks replied. “None of our plants make the glass now.”
“Don’t be afraid,” Jobs replied. This stunned Weeks, who was good-humored and confident but not used to Jobs’s reality distortion field. He tried to explain that a false sense of confidence would not overcome engineering challenges, but that was a premise that Jobs had repeatedly shown he didn’t accept. He stared at Weeks unblinking. “Yes, you can do it,” he said. “Get your mind around it. You can do it.”
As Weeks retold this story, he shook his head in astonishment. “We did it in under six months,” he said. “We produced a glass that had never been made.” Corning’s facility in Harrisburg, Kentucky, which had been making LCD displays, was converted almost overnight to make gorilla glass full-time. “We put our best scientists and engineers on it, and we just made it work.” In his airy office, Weeks has just one framed memento on display. It’s a message Jobs sent the day the iPhone came out: “We couldn’t have done it without you.”

Pounds are a unit of force, not pressure. Being able to withstand 121 pounds of force means absolutely nothing on it's own. How much is the force spread out? How far is it from the supports?

That being said, this looks very promising. I wonder if the 4S already uses it (or a variant) and that's one of the reasons why Apple kept their lips sealed?

That was my concern, too. It's an impressive accomplishment, but we shouldn't let the marketing of using force ignore how force is registered. Being glued to the other display components (something people are upset about because it means Apple forces you buy more components than you need) will help it disperse the energy and prevent shattering but it can surely still happen with a light object.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

If you are the one the brings an unused tech from a half century ago into existence, instantly becoming the largest customer for the tech before others jumped on your bandwagon you tend to get some additional benefits for making a company money.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

That was my concern, too. It's an impressive accomplishment, but we shouldn't let the marketing of using force ignore how force is registered. Being glued to the other display components (something people are upset about because it means Apple forces you buy more components than you need) will help it disperse the energy and prevent shattering but it can surely still happen with a light object.

This is a quasi-static test of a particular configuration that tests a combination of shear and tensile strength. The onset of damage during an impact event is strongly affected by loading rate and pulse duration, so it is not representative of impact resistance.

Right, all im saying is pounds CAN be used as a unit of mass. Usually it is clarified by refering to pounds-mass and pounds-force specifically.

And yes, i put more faith in wikipedia than engadget.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetry

Wikipedia is correct on this one. As it usually is on scientific issues, since the articles are mostly written by fairly knowledgeable authors - unlike most media journalists.

Yet their article is inaccurate and incomplete.

I have a graduate degree in science and had plenty of graduate level classes. While we normally used metric units, of course, we also used English units. Pound was universally used as a FORCE and if we wanted to use it as a mass (although there was rarely any reason to do so), we would use 'pound-mass'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by muppetry

More particularly, in science and engineering, the use of pounds as a unit of force is generally clarified by specifying lbf, with lb used as a unit of mass.

Incorrect. Pound-force is the default. If you say simply 'pound', it means force. Anyone using 'pound' to mean mass is sloppy - and that sloppiness would never be tolerated in real science.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

My iPhone 4 fell 3 feet from my pocket and the screen completely shattered. My iPhone 4S screen came in contact with my keys in my pocket and now has a permanent scratch across it. In real-world conditions Gorilla Glass is extremely fragile. All these claims of strength are a bunch of B.S.

Glass is not for everyone, some should stick with safer fisher-price plastic phone.

I have a graduate degree in science and had plenty of graduate level classes. While we normally used metric units, of course, we also used English units. Pound was universally used as a FORCE and if we wanted to use it as a mass (although there was rarely any reason to do so), we would use 'pound-mass'.

I'm sure that your qualifications are excellent, but are you quite sure that you want to use your graduate class experience as the definitive ruling on this? I'm curious - since mass is one of the fundamental quantities in physics - how come you rarely needed it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jragosta

Incorrect. Pound-force is the default. If you say simply 'pound', it means force. Anyone using 'pound' to mean mass is sloppy - and that sloppiness would never be tolerated in real science.

OK - I guess we simply disagree on this point. When I review journal articles for publication, if SI, though preferred, is not used, I require lbf for force. I am unaware of any publishing format guidance that follows the opposite convention that you have used, but perhaps you can point to some? Alternatively, do you have a better source than Wikipedia to support your view on this?

Anyway - we are digging in the weeds of archaic unit systems that should have been abandoned years ago in favor of SI, and we are only arguing about notation conventions, rather than substantive issues of meaning or use, and we are getting rather off topic.

No, Newtons are a unit of force, grams are a unit of mass, and pounds are a bizarre anachronism of the British Imperial system of units, which for some reason the United States of America has decided to cling to (despite a fairly violent split from the British Empire from 1773 through about the next century).
<...>

^^This.

I usually tend to understand pound-mass when I say pound, much like majjo has pointed out. The reason for this is simple: when I buy a pound of apples at the market, I expect 453.59237 grams of apples, not 4.44822162 newtons of apples. How that is being measured is immaterial to me, as long as I'm not getting ripped off.

I think people here are missing the point. Corning is at the CES to accomplish two things - network with device manufacturers and create an impression with consumers.

With respect to the second objective, one should bear in mind that consumers do not buy gorilla glass. We buy devices. But if Corning gets their brand name in our heads enough, device manufacturers may be compelled that they have to use the same glass, or risk having their products deemed second-class. Stress test demos like glass bending with steel balls are all about creating an impression. We can all swear up and down we are too smart to fall for it. But history suggests that effective branding is as important as product development.